Canadian Soccer Business (CSB)

[costarg]

Oh god, 3 pages in 3 hours!?  Gonna pour some scotch to catch up on this one....

[EJsens1]

Good on the players. I’m not a lawyer, so as many have said this is probably not going anywhere in the end in terms of finances. Frankly I don’t even think this is about cashing in for the $40 million.

I think they’re fed up with dealing with these fraudsters, people who have run this federation in the past and present. Ultimately who really is really responsible for the state we are in? It’s not the damn players I’ll tell you that. I’m glad they’ve tried to expose this to get more of a tangible response, and doing this for themselves and the players coming after them. I can’t blame them.  This is for the long term of soccer in this country because there is no short term fix 

Nobody knows better than what this team/federation needs more than the players. If you think otherwise you don’t know sports 

Edited February 22 by EJsens1

[yomurphy1]

17 minutes ago, EJsens1 said:

Good on the players. I’m not a lawyer, so as many have said this is probably not going anywhere in the end in terms of finances. Frankly I don’t even think this is about cashing in for the $40 million.

I think they’re fed up with dealing with these fraudsters, people who have run this federation in the past and present. Ultimately who really is really responsible for the state we are in? It’s not the damn players I’ll tell you that. I’m glad they’ve tried to expose this to get more of a tangible response, and doing this for themselves and the players coming after them. I can’t blame them.  This is for the long term of soccer in this country because there is no short term fix 

Nobody knows better than what this team/federation needs more than the players. If you think otherwise you don’t know sports 

Yeah, nothing attracts strong people to come work with Canada Soccer like the newfound risk of getting sued for your volunteer role.

Unless they know something wild this is embarrassing for the team and makes it harder to support them.

Edited February 22 by yomurphy1

[SthMelbRed]

12 minutes ago, EJsens1 said:

Good on the players. I’m not a lawyer, so as many have said this is probably not going anywhere in the end in terms of finances. Frankly I don’t even think this is about cashing in for the $40 million.

I think they’re fed up with dealing with these fraudsters, people who have run this federation in the past and present. Ultimately who really is really responsible for the state we are in? It’s not the damn players I’ll tell you that. I’m glad they’ve tried to expose this to get more of a tangible response, and doing this for themselves and the players coming after them. I can’t blame them.  This is for the long term of soccer in this country because there is no short term fix 

Nobody knows better than what this team/federation needs more than the players. If you think otherwise you don’t know sports 

I've been involved in sports for a long time as a player, coach, referee, administrator, spectator, etc. In my experience, it's usually the players who are the most clueless about what's needed in any given situation. As bad as our federation has been since the beginning of time, the players haven't exactly covered themselves in glory over the past 18-20 months, either.

[EJsens1]

26 minutes ago, yomurphy1 said:

Yeah, nothing attracts strong people to come work with Canada Soccer like the newfound risk of getting sued for your volunteer role.

Unless they know something wild this is embarrassing for the team and makes it harder to support them.

Yes because we’ve been attracting quality people for decades with the status quo. I think a lot of good people would like to join, just not under the current approach and regime. Recent resignations suggest that.

The point is, a complete reformation and culture change needs to happen. As I said above a long term solution will be required. If this starts that process I can live with it. Sadly this is all happening in what should be out finest moment (‘26). Do you believe tinkering with the current way the CSA is run will solve much? 

20 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

I've been involved in sports for a long time as a player, coach, referee, administrator, spectator, etc. In my experience, it's usually the players who are the most clueless about what's needed in any given situation. As bad as our federation has been since the beginning of time, the players haven't exactly covered themselves in glory over the past 18-20 months, either.

So have I. Players are amongst the most informed and knowledgeable, especially professionals who play at a high level. They know the game and what is going on behind the scenes. Does anyone really think they aren’t getting advice from informed lawyers and agents? Of course they are. I’m pretty confident there’s a lot more going in on here behind the scenes that we aren’t privy too 

[SthMelbRed]

4 minutes ago, EJsens1 said:

Yes because we’ve been attracting quality people for decades with the status quo. I think a lot of good people would like to join, just not under the current approach and regime. Recent resignations suggest that.

The point is, a complete reformation and culture change needs to happen. As I said above a long term solution will be required. If this starts that process I can live with it. Sadly this is all happening in what should be out finest moment (‘26). Do you believe tinkering with the current way the CSA is run will solve much? 

So have I. Players are amongst the most informed and knowledgeable, especially professionals who play at a high level. They know the game and what is going on behind the scenes. Does anyone really think they aren’t getting advice from informed lawyers and agents? Of course they are. I’m pretty confident there’s a lot more going in on here behind the scenes that we aren’t privy too 

I think you're being naive here, based on some of the amateur-hour stuff we've seen from players and their representatives over the past couple of years.

[EJsens1]

8 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

I think you're being naive here, based on some of the amateur-hour stuff we've seen from players and their representatives over the past couple of years.

What I’m trying to say is they’re obviously doing some due diligence on this and not just throwing shit against the wall hoping for the best. I’m sure they’re fed up with the lack of communication. They didn’t even acknowledge the players stance according to the TSN article. Can you name a soccer federation as screwed up as ours from a country who is similar in stature to Canada who in other sports have been very successful like we have (Olympics, world championships, etc) over the years? 

Edited February 22 by EJsens1

[SthMelbRed]

5 minutes ago, EJsens1 said:

What I’m trying to say is they’re obviously doing some due diligence on this and not just throwing shit against the wall hoping for the best. I’m sure they’re fed up with the lack of communication. They didn’t even acknowledge the players stance according to the TSN article. Can you name a soccer federation as screwed up as ours from a country like Canada who in other sports have been very successful like we have (Olympics, world championships, etc) over the years? 

I actually DO think they're just throwing shit against the wall and hoping for the best. The whole thing has been handled extremely poorly by both sets of players since June '22. It's so bad that they've managed to take the one group of people who have known better than anyone how brutal the CSA has been for at least 30 years (this board) and have most of them fall on the side of the CSA on most of these issues.

[EJsens1]

4 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

I actually DO think they're just throwing shit against the wall and hoping for the best. The whole thing has been handled extremely poorly by both sets of players since June '22. It's so bad that they've managed to take the one group of people who have known better than anyone how brutal the CSA has been for at least 30 years (this board) and have most of them fall on the side of the CSA on most of these issues.

Well we can agree to disagree. I believe there is a lot more going on here than we know. I guess that’s my conspiracy theory that I’ll stick too. I can’t blame the players for the mess this federation is in 

[Kent]

Yes, the players are the most clued in out of anybody. Also, the players had no idea the CSB deal existed for years after it was announced.

I'm just so sick of all the off the field news the last 2 years. Men strike. CSA throws CSB under the bus. Women threaten to strike. CSA threatens to sue the women. CSB and MediaPro sue each other. Women actually sue the CSA.

It seems like there is no money in Canadian soccer, but everyone involved thinks there is but someone else is scamming it all for themselves. I guess it's the lawyers that are scamming all the Canadian soccer dollars for themselves.

[Ally McCoist]

Can't wait to hear Wheeler's retarded biased take on this topic. Oh wait- OneSoccer doesn't have the national team rights anymore 😂😂 so maybe not biased anymore.

[Watchmen]

I think some people need to realize there's a difference between "bad at the job" and "active malice".  I suspect there's a number of people in the CSA who legitimately think they're doing a good job, or think they're the ones to solve it when in reality they're neither. I also suspect there's some there who look at it as a business opportunity for either themselves or their friends, or as a status symbol. And there's people who are good at it and are there for seemingly the right reasons, and they eventually give up because there's too many of the first two categories (see: Dino Rossi).

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

4 hours ago, EJsens1 said:

Good on the players. I’m not a lawyer, so as many have said this is probably not going anywhere in the end in terms of finances. Frankly I don’t even think this is about cashing in for the $40 million... 

Mediapro's recent legal action against CSB maybe provided the inspiration for this. Think it's mainly about the following:

https://www.tsn.ca/soccer/cspa-files-40-million-lawsuit-against-current-and-former-canada-soccer-board-members-1.2079230

...According to court documents, lawyers for the women's team players wrote to Canada Soccer on Dec. 19, advising the federation that if appreciable progress were not made towards amending the controversial CSB deal, players would claw back their name, image and likeness rights from the federation on Feb. 1...

being used as a way to pressure CSB into a renegotiation. More about a wider strategy of forcing an end to the deal than cashing in, in other words.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

2 hours ago, Kent said:

Yes, the players are the most clued in out of anybody. Also, the players had no idea the CSB deal existed for years after it was announced...

That's a bit of a stretch to put it mildly. The issues that led to the Panama game strike were the finer details of the CSB deal that only started to enter the public domain after qualification for Qatar was secured.

[Soro17]

For the non-lawyers out there, please spend two minutes and google ‘business judgment rule Canada’. In short, courts in Canada are loathe to interfere in business decisions made by directors  In the absence of fraud or bad faith, it is a difficult obstacle to overcome which is why the legal action will almost certainly fail. To hold the directors personally liable for board decisions is even a step beyond.  This suit seems like an ill-advised stunt  

A longer explainer:

The business judgment rule rests on the related notions that (i) directors and officers of corporations often have business expertise that the courts lack, and (ii) they should be free of courts' interference in their deliberations to the extent possible. In the 2004 case of Peoples Department Store Inc. (Trustee of) v. Wise, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized that many decisions made in the course of business, though perhaps ultimately unsuccessful, are reasonable and defensible at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made. Moreover, business decisions are sometimes made under significant pressure and in the absence of detailed information.

It is easy to see unsuccessful business decisions as unreasonable or imprudent with the benefit of hindsight. The business judgment rule is intended to guard against this bias.

While the court will not defer to a decision that it deems wholly unreasonable, it will respect a business decision made (i) independently and without a conflict of interest, (ii) in good faith, (iii) on a reasonably informed basis, (iv) based on information available at the time, and (v) where the decision falls within a reasonable range of options available at the time.

As Weiler J.A. put it in the case of Maple Leaf Foods Inc. v. Schneider Corp., the court will look to see whether the directors made a reasonable decision, not a perfect one.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

25 minutes ago, Soro17 said:

...it will respect a business decision made (i) independently and without a conflict of interest, (ii) in good faith, (iii) on a reasonably informed basis, (iv) based on information available at the time, and (v) where the decision falls within a reasonable range of options available at the time...

Don't claim to be a legal expert but given there are serious questions as to whether the proper procedures were followed when the deal was signed and whether the officeholders properly represented the interests of all the stakeholders they were representing (which includes the CWNT who are now effectively being used to prop up the finances of a men's pro league), I don't think this deal necessarily stands up to all those conditions. Think the obvious question would be more where the players are getting the money to fund what could be a very expensive legal process.

[Ottawafan]

8 hours ago, yomurphy1 said:

Yeah, nothing attracts strong people to come work with Canada Soccer like the newfound risk of getting sued for your volunteer role.

Unless they know something wild this is embarrassing for the team and makes it harder to support them.

Or maybe we start attracting a better quality individual once we expose and move on from the typical fugaises involved at various levels. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

After reading the player's statement, or the summary of the lawsuit, it is clear to me that the CSB is merely the straw man, something they need to direct blame. A scapegoat of sorts. The claims are in some cases simply wrong, such as the assumption that the CSB deal made worse what was there previously. I find the lawsuit, and previous ranting about CSB, largely pathological in nature; controlled pathology, but basically nuts. The suit is also clearly rhetorical, it reminds me a bit of the Hans Niemann suit against Carlsen, Hikaru and chess.com: the point is to make a point.

So point made. The press loves this sort of stuff because it is so fundamentally unsubstantial, it is mostly about junctures with weak core substance.

I say this despite the fact I've been thinking a lot of how frustrated I am with the CSA recently, and especially with Crooks. Our inoperative operative. I am willing to accept that she has serious defects and it is a mistake to have her at the CSA, because she's a bureaucratic dinosaur and is stonewalling on key decisions we need to move forward. She's an impediment, it seems, when just a few months ago I still felt she deserved a chance. 

Funny though, because the women have no clear idea of what should happen going forward. They already proved they could easily distracted and fall on their faces, by all the hullaballoo before the last WWC, but are willing to do the same thing for this Gold Cup.

The other side of it all is that Bontis, another guy who had serious defects (when he insulted Sinclair to her face in a meeting, he needed to be immediately eliminated), was the guy on whose watch we made Qatar. Also the guy who was president when the Women won gold in Tokyo. This happens sometimes, the club president, the FA, are a mess, useless, but lead you to trophies (Rubiales in Spain for the women, another case). 

Since my basic philosophy is that I prefer winning to not winning, and that you can have losers and idiots running things when you win or lose, don't worry that much about who's running things (criminality aside) as long as you win.

[Copes]

5 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Don't claim to be a legal expert but given there are serious questions as to whether the proper procedures were followed when the deal was signed and whether the officeholders properly represented the interests of all the stakeholders they were representing (which includes the CWNT who are now effectively being used to prop up the finances of a men's pro league), I don't think this deal necessarily stands up to all those conditions. Think the obvious question would be more where the players are getting the money to fund what could be a very expensive legal process.

Out of curiosity, what are the "proper procedures" everyone keeps talking about? I'm curious what the proper way to sell media rights and kickstart a soccer league to secure a world cup bid is. 

I feel like a lot of people (and certainly the players) have no idea how a business is usually run. Don't get me wrong I think most on the CSA board have no idea either but I'm just so tired of all this moaning about CSB. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

13 hours ago, narduch said:

Would they also need to prove a better deal was available?

I think it would be easy to prove that without Covid, the Ukraine war, supply chain problems exacerbated by Brexit and a lack of accountability at the CMHC, a better deal would have been a shoo-in.

And we would almost certainly have more affordable housing in Canadian cities.

[Unnamed Trialist]

But seriously folks: for the me the only key errors of the CSB deal were

1-the way it was locked in for such a long period without recourse to regular an diligent revision. 

2-not including a clause whereby the amount paid would increase in proportion to the revenue CSB was generating, as a sort of commission.

Everything else is fairly standard, in a world where soccer finances are rather complicated even in the most normal circumstances.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

19 minutes ago, Copes said:

Out of curiosity, what are the "proper procedures" everyone keeps talking about? ...

Some members of the CSA board were of the opinion that the CSB deal had not been ratified properly by them. The details of this are very much a matter of public record at this point.

[SF]

5 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Don't claim to be a legal expert but given there are serious questions as to whether the proper procedures were followed when the deal was signed and whether the officeholders properly represented the interests of all the stakeholders they were representing (which includes the CWNT who are now effectively being used to prop up the finances of a men's pro league), I don't think this deal necessarily stands up to all those conditions. Think the obvious question would be more where the players are getting the money to fund what could be a very expensive legal process.

This is the crux of it. They entered a 20 year agreement with a de facto related party and did so without fully testing the market for other offers. 
 

That will be the argument the players lawsuit makes and it names the directors because they have a fiduciary obligation (codified in law) to ensure a good process was followed. 
 

Maybe a full and proper decision making process was followed, but it seems reasonable to suggest one wasn’t. 
 

This will be all about process. 
 

The players may win or lose, but that will be their legal case. 

[CanSoccfan11]

I am curious why some people think this will lead to change or the CSB deal getting thrown out.  They aren't suing the CSA or CSB, they are suing individuals, many of which are no longer on the board and have nothing to do with overseeing the organization.  The best they can hope for is for resignations from people named in the suit that are still on the board.

[InglewoodJack]

13 hours ago, prairiecanuck said:

Franchise fees were 3 mil.  Team financials will show teams losing money.  Good luck arguing the franchises are worth 100 mil...lol 

Don’t quote me on it, but I think CF Montreal is valued at something like $350M which when I last checked would rank them like 10th or 11th in the premier league in terms of valuation, and obviously the big clubs have already eclipsed a lot of NHL teams and even some MLB teams I believe. Obviously being a CPL owner is not a great way to make yourself money, but owning a franchise in one of the world’s biggest sporting markets in a rapidly growing sport and your team is effectively protected against relegation? Maybe their valuations aren’t $100M, but I wouldn’t be surprised if these CPL clubs have shockingly high valuations, at least on paper. No one is paying $350M to buy CF Montreal, and no one would pay tens of millions to buy Forge, but I wonder what the spreadsheet says these clubs are worth.